Environment

June 20, 2025 in Creekside Village Specific Plan DEIR Environment Notice Of Availability Residential Specific Plan

Creekside Village Specific Plan DRAFT EIR Published June 20, 2025

DRAFT Environmental Impact Report – JUNE 2025

Public review and comment period ENDS on August 19, 2025

From the June 20, 2025 Notice of Availability:

DOCUMENT AVAILABILITY AND REVIEW PERIOD: This DEIR is available for public and agency review for a 60-day period beginning June 20, 2025, and ending August 19, 2025. The purpose of this comment period is to consider the content of the DEIR and the potential environmental impacts that may result from project implementation. Comments pertaining to the environmental impact analysis, criteria and thresholds, mitigation measures and alternatives presented in the DEIR will be considered by the County during preparation of the Final EIR. The Final EIR will include copies of the comments received during the comment period and the County’s responses to comments pertaining to the environmental review and DEIR. A subsequent scheduled public hearing will be conducted on the project upon completion of the Final EIR when the County considers action on the project. The County must certify the Final EIR prior to project approval. If you wish to be notified of that hearing date, please provide your name and mailing address to the Planning and Building Department.

REDUCED IMPACT ALTERNATIVE:
Preparation of an EIR requires the lead agency, in this case the County, to consult with local Native American Tribes (Tribes) that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area regarding the presence of tribal cultural resources (TCRs). Through the consultation process with local Tribes, it was revealed that TCRs exist within the site and would be impacted by the project and could not be avoided. In addition, the Latrobe School District indicated during preparation of the DEIR that its existing schools could not absorb the increase in students generated by the project and requested a reduction in the number of conventional housing units. To address potential significant impacts, an EIR is required to evaluate an alternative that would avoid or lessen environmental impacts while still meeting most of the objectives of the project. In collaboration with the Tribes and Latrobe School District, a new land use plan, the Reduced Impact Alternative (RIA), was developed which avoids impacts to TCRs and reduces the total number of residential units from 918 to 763, including limiting the number of conventional housing units to a maximum of 150 with the remainder restricted to Active Adult. The RIA proposes a 7.5-acre Village Park with 1.6 acres of the park containing a Planned Development (PD) overlay designation that could allow for neighborhood commercial uses to serve the plan area, similar to the proposed project. These potential commercial uses would require approval of a separate Conditional Use Permit and Planned Development. There would be two additional Neighborhood Parks, 4.4 and 2.2 acres in size, for a total of 14.1 acres in parks and 44.4 acres in open space. Given the ability to address significant impacts to TCRs and the concerns of the Latrobe School District, it was decided that the RIA should be analyzed at a project-specific level so that the County could ultimately approve the RIA instead of the proposed project.

This DEIR therefore evaluates the land use plan that was originally submitted by the applicant as the proposed project and also analyzes the RIA at the project-specific level, either of which could be approved by the County. Based on analysis completed at this time, County staff intends to recommend the RIA for approval because it avoids impacts to TCRs, reduces additional environmental impacts, and is the land use plan preferred by both the Tribes and the Latrobe School District.

June 2025 Creekside Village Specific Plan Draft Environment Impact Report Documents

The Draft Environmental Impact Report is available in ten sections – beginning with section 0.1 Creekside Village SP Cover Page, through section 6.0 Creekside Village SP DEIR Preparers. The applicant then provides all ten sections in one document, the Combined DEIR Creekside Village Specific Plan. This is further supported by ten appendices beginning with appendix A – Creekside Village SP DEIR Appendix A – NOP and Combined Comments, and concluding withe appendix J – Creekside Village SP DEIR Appendix J – Fire Safe Plan.

The DRAFT EIR documents are available on the El Dorado County Planning Department EIR page for the Creekside Village SP project.

The DRAFT EIR Documents, links, and other project documents can also be found on the EDH APAC Creekside Village project Documents page

October 5, 2020 in El Dorado County Environment General Plan

Public Hearing for adoption of a Resolution to partially decertify the Final Environmental Impact Report of the General Plan Biological Resources Policy

El Dorado County provides Notice of Public Hearing.

The County of El Dorado Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing in the Supervisors Meeting Room, 330 Fair Lane, Placerville, CA 95667 on October 20, 2020 at 11:00 a.m., to consider: 1) the adoption of a Resolution to partially decertify the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the General Plan Biological Resources Policy Update (Project) only as it
relates to the County’s determination that focusing on preservation of oak woodland habitat in the Highway 50 corridor was not the best course of action and it was not feasible to focus on preserving the oak woodlands within the Highway 50 corridor; 2) directing staff to augment the administrative record as authorized by CEQA, including the missing reports and studies, as set forth in the court’s ruling in Rural Communities United v. County of El Dorado, Superior Court of the County of El Dorado, Case No. PC20170536; and 3) the adoption of a Resolution to recertify the portions of the FEIR that were decertified by the adoption of the prior resolution. The proposed action is in response to the Court’s orders in the writ issued in the above noted litigation. The FEIR for the Project was certified by adoption of Resolution 127-2017 on October 24, 2017. The proposed decertification is a partial decertification; all other parts of the FEIR/EIR will remain in effect.

Taking too long?

Reload document

Open in new tab

Download Public Notice [279.42 KB]

See the 2017 El Dorado County General Plan Biological Resources Policy Update HERE

February 2, 2018 in Environment Government Stormwater Resource Plan

Stormwater Resource Plan -SWRP- For El Dorado County West Slope

El Dorado County has released the following regarding the process underway by the El Dorado County Water Agency, in conjunction with El Dorado County, and the City of Placerville – Public Comments can be submitted up to February 26, 2018

The El Dorado County Water Agency, in collaboration with El Dorado County and the City of Placerville, is developing a stormwater resource plan (SWRP) for the West Slope of El Dorado County.
The SWRP is a watershed-based comprehensive strategic document that summarizes a renewed approach to watershed resource planning and stormwater runoff management in the County. The plan will also incorporate prioritized actions, affordability considerations, and nexus to other related resource planning and implementation efforts to support efficient and responsible implementation.
The SWRP is available for review at http://www.edcgov.us/Water/Pages/Projects.aspx. The above-mentioned Agencies are seeking public comments on the SWRP from January 26, 2018 to February 26, 2018.
Please provide any comments to the plan during this period using the comment log on the webpage and submit them to edcwa@edcgov.us by February 26, 2018.

Click HERE to review the Stormwater Resource Plan

August 16, 2017 in Commercial Development EDH APAC Environment Residential Town Center Village T

APAC Meeting Coverage – Village Life

The El Dorado Hills Village Life has a new article regarding the August 9 2017 APAC meeting, focusing on the El Dorado Hills Apartments at Town Center East.

From the article:

A Stockton-based developer went back to the architectural drawing board to reduce the density of its original plans for the apartment complex proposed on a vacant 4.6-acre lot in the heart of El Dorado Hills Town Center.

Voting members of the Area Planning Advisory Committee, which studies land use projects and gives recommendations to the El Dorado County Planning Commission, voted against the project last Wednesday night and encouraged the Planning Commission to do the same. Planning commissioners received a project presentation last Thursday but did not vote.
The El Dorado County Board of Supervisors will ultimately vote to approve or deny the El Dorado Hills Apartments project, which needs a General Plan amendment since the project calls for 47 dwelling units per acre. The parcel’s current General Plan land use designation allows a maximum of 24. When the project was first proposed in 2014 developers designed it with 56 units per acre. The four-story luxury apartment complex is 15 percent less dense today, with 214 units, ranging from studio to one-bedroom and two-bedroom apartments.
Representatives from developer Spanos Corporation spoke at an APAC meeting last Wednesday night inside El Dorado Hills Fire Station 85 ahead of the vote. The project would consist of two, four-story apartment buildings, outdoor recreation areas and an informal open space area. There would also be a five-story parking structure that would house 411 enclosed parking spaces for residents, 22 motorcycle spaces and 54 guest spaces.
Spanos Corp. Division Manager Jeff Morgan said, “We went back to the drawing board. We believe in this project.” He described it as “Old World architecture,” blending in with Town Center’s aesthetics.
As in 2014 it was described as an ideal place for empty nesters and young professionals — “A lifestyle by choice, that is maintenance free with amenities,” Morgan explained.
Morgan, citing a change in the market since 2014, declined to share expected rents, only saying, “Rents would be competitive.”
Three years ago Spanos Corp. officials said rents would range between $1,600 to $2,200 per month.
El Dorado Hills resident John Davey read a committee report of non-support written by El Dorado Hills Community Council members who extensively studied the project. The first concern was that the project would “nearly double the density under the General Plan,” Davey said. “This would set a precedent.”
Davey said the committee was also concerned about traffic. Several residents in the audience Wednesday night asked questions, uneasy that 54 guest spots wouldn’t be enough and would impact the already limited parking in Town Center.
Morgan said the development company “used historical data” to determine how many guest spaces are needed. “It’s a substantial number,” he added. “This parking ratio works well in our other communities.” When asked, Morgan said Spanos does not have a similar project in the greater Sacramento area but has many across the country.
Davey read the next concern, regarding whether the project would “revitalize” Town Center as a place where people would live, work and play. “We don’t buy the argument,” he said. “There is no job center here. People who live in the complex would most likely be commuting to Sacramento or somewhere else to work.”
Davey continued that the complex “doesn’t address our affordable housing issue” in El Dorado Hills, adding, “This isn’t it. Luxury and affordable are at odds.”
There were also concerns about noise and the potential loss of community events, such as the Santa Run, fireworks, concerts and farmers market.
“How will this benefit the community?” Davey read from the report. A hotel was once planned for the vacant lot, but with this plan, “Transient Occupancy Taxes would continue going to Folsom.”
While Davey, and then APAC members, thanked Spanos representatives for working on reducing density and for coming to the meeting, he ended by saying, “We don’t believe this project is the cure-all for the ails of Town Center.”
Voting members of APAC agreed. At the end of the meeting they voted 7-0 against approval of the project, citing traffic as their “biggest issue.”

Read the full article at the El Dorado Hills Village Life website